Population‐based prevalence of polypharmacy and patterns of medication use in southwestern Iran: A cross‐sectional study

Abstract

Background: Pharmaceutical medications are considered an important component of healthcare delivery and there is a need for its rational use; although there have been major improvements in the pharmaceutical sector in the recent past, inappropriate medication use is considered a major threat to patients' health. Therefore, the pattern of medication use should be monitored routinely. The aim of this study was to investigate the population-based prevalence of polypharmacy and the patterns of medication use in southwestern Iran. We also investigated correlates between polypharmacy and patterns of medication use.Methods: Data from the Khuzestan Comprehensive Health Study (KCHS) which consists information of 30 506 with age range to 20 to 65 years were used. Crude and age-standardized prevalence of polypharmacy and their 95% confidence intervals were estimated for different subpopulations. Multivariable Poisson regression modeling was applied, and adjusted prevalence ratios and their 95% confidence intervals were estimated. The Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical classification system (first and second levels) was used for drug classification in different groups based on age, gender, and socioeconomic status.Erfan Taherifard and Zahra Mohammadi are co-first authors.

Prevalence and global trends of polypharmacy in patients with chronic liver disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis

“…The composition of the data sources of the reviewed studies ranged from community primary care-based electronic longitudinal patient records, [ 9 , 11 , 16 ] multicenter linked NAFLD registries, [ 8 ] and university/tertiary hospital records [ 5 ] (Table 1 ). The reviewed studies were distributed across 4 continents, with 2 studies conducted in Iran [ 17 , 18 ] and 1 each in Australia, [ 9 ] UK [ 11 ] , Qatar, [ 5 ] Spain [ 16 ] , and the United States [ 8 ] (Map).…”

“…When studies were based on their methodological quality and risk of bias, we found the following prevalence estimates; “unlikely biased” 30% [ 8 , 11 , 16 , 17 ] ; “some suggestion of bias” 21% [ 9 , 18 ] ; “substantial suggestion of bias” 31%. [ 5 ] See supplemental Figure 2, http://links.lww.com/MD/I280 , Supplemental Content, which illustrates the differential effect of study methodological quality on the risk of bias.…”

Prevalence and global trends of polypharmacy in patients with chronic Liver disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis

“…When studies were based on their methodological quality and risk of bias, we found the following prevalence estimates; "unlikely biased" 30% (17)(7) (16) (10); "some suggestion of bias" 21% (15) (18); "substantial suggestion of bias" 31%. (5) (Fig S2).…”

“…The PRISMA chart (Figure 1) outlines reasons for exclusion of various studies. Thereafter (n = 27) potentially relevant studies were selected for full text review; of which Seven studies (15) (7) (5)(16) (10) (17,18) inclusion for the systematic review and meta-analysis. The composition of the data source of the reviewed studies ranged from community primary carebased electronic longitudinal patient records (15) (10) ( 16), multicentre linked NAFLD registries (7), and University/tertiary hospital records (5) (Table 1).…”

“…The composition of the data source of the reviewed studies ranged from community primary carebased electronic longitudinal patient records (15) (10) ( 16), multicentre linked NAFLD registries (7), and University/tertiary hospital records (5) (Table 1). The reviewed studies were distributed across 4 continents with one study conducted in Australia (15), two in Iran (17) (18), one in the United Kingdom (UK) (( 10), Qatar (19), Spain (( 16), and the United States of America ( 7) each. A third (33.3%, N = 2) of the studies were conducted in Europe.…”